Ben, Jeff, Jon, lists, 1) Can we say that there can be many triads, depending one how one defines them, but the Peircean triad is special and identical with a mathematical category ?
2) "Triad" is a system of three entities, while "trichotomy" is the process of dividing a system into three parts, either physically or mentally, the latter case of which is called "prescinding" by Peirce. With all the best. Sung __________________________________________________ Sungchul Ji, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy Rutgers University Piscataway, N.J. 08855 732-445-4701 www.conformon.net > Jeff D., Jon, > > I'd just like to note that the questions of triads versus trichotomies > is something that we've discussed a number of times at peirce-l over the > years. For my part, I like using those words in the way that Jon and > others have recommended - 'triad' for the triadically related sign, > object, interpretant, which are involved as the correlates in genuinely > triadic action, and 'trichotomy' for three-fold classifications, > especially categorially correlated ones such as qualisign, sinsign, > legisign. However, it should be noted that there are passages in which > Peirce calls trichotomies 'triads', and other passages by Peirce that > make no sense unless one follows the 'triad'-versus-'trichotomy' > distinction. I don't have the quotes handy but we've been over it many > times. A separate issue is the one about whether the > sign-object-interpretant triad is also categorially correlated trichotomy. > > Best, Ben > > On 10/1/2014 11:10 PM, Jeffrey Brian Downard wrote: > >> Hello Jon, >> >> If you have links to the earlier discussions of the distinction between >> "triadicities" and "trichotomies", I'd like to take a look. In addition >> to being interested in distinction you are making, I'd like to read more >> about how you are thinking about the projection of the triadic relations >> onto the mutually exclusive and exhaustive partitions of a domain. >> >> In his monograph <Reading Peirce Reading>, Richard Smyth makes much of >> the conceptions of the restrictions and limitations that apply to a >> given domain of inquiry. I'd like to see how your account of the >> partitions of the domain compares to his reconstruction of some >> arguments Peirce develops in "How to Make Our Ideas Clear." >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jeff >> >> Jeff Downard >> Associate Professor >> Department of Philosophy >> NAU >> (o) 523-8354 >> ________________________________________ >> From: Jon Awbrey [jawb...@att.net] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 7:44 PM >> To: Peirce List 1 >> Subject: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Natural Propositions ⢠Selected Passages >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
